[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Fw: [idn] IDNs in email message bodies
- To: idn@ops.ietf.org
- Subject: Re: Fw: [idn] IDNs in email message bodies
- From: "Eric A. Hall" <ehall@ehsco.com>
- Date: Tue, 27 Mar 2001 14:21:45 -0800
- Delivery-date: Tue, 27 Mar 2001 14:23:10 -0800
- Envelope-to: idn-data@psg.com
- Organization: EHS Company
> Encoded-words are designed for parts of the headers that
> are strictly for human consumption, not the machine-readable parts.
Yeah, should have read "2047-encoding" <ascii@ACE-encoding>
The point is still the same, ACE-encoding/decoding can occur at the same
time as 2047-encoding/decoding, when the display data is converted into
protocol data.
> > More problematic is extra-config data, such as a hand-coded Reply-To
> > header field in the message, as this data will bypass the mailer's
> > boundary checks.
>
> I don't see why. According to RFC 822 the Reply-To: field has the
> exact same syntax as the To: field, and MUAs routinely do syntax
> checking on the To: field, so they should do the same checking on
> the Reply-To: field.
I am thinking about command line tools and automated mail generators which
will not view Reply-To as a protocol operation.
--
Eric A. Hall http://www.ehsco.com/
Internet Core Protocols http://www.oreilly.com/catalog/coreprot/